3The three remaining conservatives (known as “originalists” because they hold that themeaning of the Constitution is its “original public meaning”) kept objecting that the role of theSupreme Court should not be to
create laws
but only to
interpret
the Constitution and the lawsthat had been passed by Congress and the state legislatures. But the six liberal justices paid noattention. They decided cases in light of their understanding of the needs of society, and theytook more and more precedents not from the U. S. Constitution but from international laws.From the end of 2009, Justices Roberts, Thomas, and Alito have been constantly outvoted 6-3,and they are essentially powerless. It might be 20 or 30 years before enough new appointmentscould be made to change the far-Left dominance of the Supreme Court.Finally the far-Left had the highest prize: complete control of the Supreme Court. Andthey set about quickly to expedite cases by which they would enact the entire agenda of the farLeft in American politics – everything they had hoped for and more took just a few keydecisions.
Same-sex “marriage”
The most far-reaching transformation of American society came from the SupremeCourt’s stunning affirmation, in early 2010, that homosexual “marriage” was a “constitutional”right that had to be respected by all 50 states because laws barring same-sex “marriage” violatedthe Equal Protection clause of the U.S. Constitution. Suddenly, homosexual “marriage” was thelaw of the land in all 50 states, and no state legislature, no state Supreme Court, no stateConstitutional amendment, not even Congress, had any power to change it. The Supreme Courthad ruled, and the discussion was over. This was a blatant example of
creating law
by the court,for homosexual “marriage” was mentioned nowhere in the Constitution, nor would any of theauthors have imagined that same-sex “marriage” could be derived from their words. But it justfollowed the precedents that had been set by state supreme courts in Massachusetts (2003),
2
California (2008)
3
and Connecticut (2008).
4
President Obama repeated his declaration that he
personally
was against same-sex“marriage”, but he told the nation there was nothing he could do. The Supreme Court had ruled,and it was now the law of the land. The president asked the nation to support the decision.After that decision, many other policies changed, and several previous Supreme Courtcases were reversed rather quickly — raising the question, “Is America still the land of the free?”(1) Boy Scouts: “The land of the free”? The Boy Scouts no longer exist as anorganization. They chose to disband rather than be forced to obey the Supreme Court decisionthat they would have to hire homosexual scoutmasters and allow them to sleep in tents withyoung boys. (This was to be expected with a change in the court, since the 2000 decision
BoyScouts of America v. Dale,
which affirmed the right of the Boy Scouts as a private organization
2
Goodridge v. Department of Health
, decided by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, November 18, 2003.
3
In re: Marriage Cases,
decided by the California State Supreme Court, May 15, 2008.
4
Kerrigan v, Commissioner of Public Health,
decided by the Connecticut State Supreme Court, October 10, 2008.
Leave a Comment